Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
5 canonical passages across 4 cases, quoted by 472 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Federated Department Stores, Inc. v. Moitie.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Federated Department Stores, Inc. v. Moitie Anchor | red | “a final judgment on the merits of an action precludes the parties or their privies from relitigating issues that were or could have been raised in that action.” | 301 |
| 2 | Federated Department Stores, Inc. v. Moitie | red | “the dismissal for failure to state a claim under federal rule of civil procedure 12(b)(6) is a 'judgment on the merits.” | 109 |
| 3 | Ammex, Inc. v. United States | green | “(1) the parties are identical or in privity; (2) the first suit proceeded to a final judgment on the merits; and (3) the second claim is based on the same set of transactional facts as the first.” | 31 |
| 4 | In Re Varat Enterprises, Inc., Debtor. First Union Commercial Corporation v. Nelson, Mullins, Riley and Scarborough | green | “not only of every matter actually adjudicated in the earlier case, but also of every claim that might have been presented.” | 17 |
| 5 | Orca Yachts, L.L.C. v. Mollicam, Incorporated | green | “the doctrine of res judicata encompasses two concepts: 1) claim preclusion and 2) issue preclusion, or collateral estoppel.” | 14 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.